The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 43 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up
Open accessAbstract
Objective To evaluate the hypothesis of stimulant medication effect on physical growth in the follow-up phase of the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD.Method Naturalistic subgroups were established based on patterns of treatment with stimulant medication at baseline, 14-, 24-, and 36-month assessments: not medicated (n = 65), newly medicated (n = 88), consistently medicated (n = 70), and inconsistently medicated (n = 147). Analysis of variance was used to evaluate effects of subgroup and assessment time on measures of relative size (z scores) obtained from growth norms.Results The subgroup x assessment time interaction was significant for z height (p <.005) and z weight (p <.0001), due primarily to divergence of the newly medicated and the not medicated subgroups. These initially stimulant-naïve subgroups had z scores significantly >0 at baseline. The newly medicated subgroup showed decreases in relative size that reached asymptotes by the 36-month assessment, when this group showed average growth of 2.0 cm and 2.7 kg less than the not medicated subgroup, which showed slight increases in relative size.Conclusions Stimulant-naïve school-age children with Combined type attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder were, as a group, larger than expected from norms before treatment but show stimulant-related decreases in growth rates after initiation of treatment, which appeared to reach asymptotes within 3 years without evidence of growth rebound.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In the MTA 3-year follow-up, stimulant-naive children with ADHD Combined type who started and continued stimulant medication showed declines in relative height and weight compared with a stimulant-untreated clinical control subgroup, with no evidence of growth rebound. The authors conclude that stimulant-related growth slowing can persist up to 3 years and may warrant revision of monitoring recommendations.
Key findings
- Naturalistic subgroup × assessment time interactions were significant for z height (p < .005) and z weight (p < .0001); decomposition showed the “starting medication” contrast accounted for 92% of the height interaction and 72.8% of the weight interaction.
- The newly medicated subgroup (n = 88) diverged from the not medicated subgroup (n = 65): by 36 months, newly medicated children were 3.04 cm shorter and 2.71 kg lighter than not medicated children; the abstract reports average growth of 2.0 cm and 2.7 kg less than the not medicated subgroup. The not medicated subgroup showed slight increases in relative size.
- At 36 months, z height/z weight were: not medicated 0.541/0.756; newly medicated 0.073/0.293; consistently medicated −0.120/0.156; LNCG 0.234/0.425. Exposure regressions showed negative slopes for years treated (z height 0.589 − 0.218[years], p < .0001; z weight 0.776 − 0.183[years], p < .0004) and dose-related height reduction (z height 0.493 − 0.0117[mg/kg], p = .0010) but not weight (p = .2486).
- No growth rebound was supported: newly medicated children increased slightly from 24 to 36 months, but the not medicated subgroup did too, and treated groups did not exceed the untreated clinical control. Findings did not support delayed maturation; untreated ADHD children grew faster than norms/LNCG.
Methods
- MTA follow-up of 579 children aged 7.0–9.9 years with ADHD Combined type from seven North American sites. Naturalistic subgroups were based on SCA-PI reports of stimulant use in the 30 days before baseline, 14-, 24-, and 36-month assessments: not medicated (n = 65), newly medicated (n = 88), consistently medicated (n = 70), and inconsistently medicated (n = 147); complete data were available for 370 of 485 follow-up children.
- CDC 2000 growth norms converted height and weight to z scores. Two-way ANOVA tested subgroup, assessment time, and interaction; orthogonal decomposition compared starting medication and consistency of medication; regression related cumulative exposure/dose to 36-month relative size. A local normative comparison group of classmates provided comparison at 24 and 36 months (213 of 279).
Limitations
- The authors state the most important limitation is lack of random assignment to the naturalistic subgroups; subgroups were formed by initial MTA assignment and later self-selection to start, stop, or continue medication, so the never-medicated group may have been selected for good behavioral response and medicated groups may have included poor behavior-therapy responders.
- The authors state follow-up covered only 3 years, participants were 10–12 years old at the 36-month assessment, and ultimate adult size was not addressed; only immediate-release methylphenidate was systematically evaluated, while Adderall and controlled-release formulations were not evaluated.
- The authors state medication use was defined from SCA-PI reports and the specific contributions of dose or consistency were not adequately evaluated; planned weekend/summer medication holidays were not evaluated. Evident from the text: the observational subgroup design cannot establish causality and may be confounded by selection or indication.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
37 Own result · 28 Not checked yet · 20 Own method · 12 Own interpretation · 7 No basis given
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“at the 36-month assessment, there were no group differences apparent.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which accounted for 92% of the interaction for height (F 3,441 = 11.77;p < .0001)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which showed slight increases in relative size.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plainn = 65 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The newly medicated subgroup manifested a slight increase in relative size from the 24-to 36-month assessment.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Stimulant-naı ¨ve school-age children with Combined type attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder were, as a group, larger than expected from norms before treatment”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and 72.8% for weight (F 3,438 = 21.76;p < .0001)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The stimulant-untreated clinical control group was taller and heavier than average (not medicated: z height 0.541 and z weight 0.765)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For those left untreated with stimulant medication, the growth rate over the next 3 years was greater as opposed to less than that of the LNCG (the classmate control group) or the population norms.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fitted equations had negative slopes indicating significant exposure-related reduction in relative height”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and z weight (p < .0001)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“and z weight (F 9,1,068 = 8.88; p < .0001)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the stimulant-untreated clinical control (the not medicated subgroup) also showed a similar increase in relative size across this time frame.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At entry into the MTA, the height and weight of stimulant-naı ¨ve 7.0-to 9.9-year-old children were greater than expected (rather than smaller as would be predicted by delayed maturation).”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The subgroup  assessment time interaction was significant for z height (p < .005)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“significant interactions of naturalistic subgroup  assessment time (Fig. 1 and Table 3) for z height (F 9,1083 = 3.88; p < .005)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, the participants without continuous treatment with stimulant medication (the inconsistently medicated subgroup) did not manifest a decrease in relative size during the MTA protocol”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We did not document a decrease in relative size in the group of participants with a history of treatment before entry into the MTA protocol during subsequent treatment with stimulant medication over the 3 years.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, this group (the consistently medicated naturalistic subgroup) was smaller than the stimulantnaı ¨ve group (the newly medicated naturalistic subgroup) at entry”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the 36-month assessment, the average relative size (z height and z weight) of the naturalistic subgroups were negatively related to the average cumulative exposure to stimulant medication.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This decomposition of variance into nonoverlapping components revealed that the overall interaction was due primarily to the starting medication component”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“when this group showed average growth of 2.0 cm and 2.7 kg less than the not medicated subgroup”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plaincorrelationaln = 88 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The newly medicated subgroup showed decreases in relative size that reached asymptotes by the 36-month assessment”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plaindirectn = 88 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the participants in the study entered between the ages of 7 and 9 years”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“more than half of those had taken medication 950% of the time from baseline”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“smaller than expected annual growth rates in the subgroup of ADHD children who were continuously treated”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“greater than expected annual growth rates in the subgroup of ADHD children who were not treated with stimulant medication”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“they were between the ages of 10 to 12 years when the 36-month assessments were performed”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At 14 months 26% of Beh subjects had found it necessary to add nonprotocol medication because Beh alone was not sufficient treatment”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(z height 0.589 Y 0.218[years of treatment], F 1,369 = 19.18;p 9 .0001)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(z height 0.493 j 0.0117[mg/kg], F 1,365 = 11.04;p .0010)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(z weight 0.547 j 0.0045[mg/kg], F 1,365 = 1.34; p 9 .2486)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(z weight 0.776 Y 0.183[years of treatment], F 1,365 = 12.68; p < .0004)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, our findings do not support the hypothesis of delayed maturation in children with ADHD.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting that early treatment of children (before the ages of 7Y9 years) with stimulant medication may have produced a reduction of growth rate before entry into the MTA protocol.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After adjustment for multiple tests (0.05/26 = 0.002), none of these tests were statistically significant.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“without evidence of growth rebound.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · hedged
“Our findings do not support the hypothesis of growth rebound when treatment is continued”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plainn = 88- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · hedged
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Studies using positron emission tomography show that clinical doses of methylphenidate in adults (Volkow et al., 2002) and adolescents (Neto et al., 2002) increased (rather than decreased, as proposed by some theories) extrasynaptic levels of dopamine in the striatum due to potent blockade of dopamine transporters”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which appeared to reach asymptotes within 3 years without evidence of growth rebound.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
hedgeddirectn = 88- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but show stimulant-related decreases in growth rates after initiation of treatment”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · boosted
“we documented a significant stimulant-related decrease in growth rate in the newly medicated subgroup”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
boosteddirectn = 88 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · boosted
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most important limitation of this study is the lack of random assignment to the subgroups that were evaluated here.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Studies of mice (Bosse et al., 1997) that lack the dopamine transporter show that high levels of dopamine occur in the hypothalamus as well as the striatum.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bosse et al., 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the never-medicated group was determined more by original randomization than the other three naturalistic groups”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Complete information was obtained at each time point for 370 of the 485 children in the MTA followup”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plainn = 485- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is an important new finding from the MTA, suggesting a disorder-related accelerated rather than delayed maturation.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but the specific contributions of dose or consistency of medication use have not been adequately evaluated”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In two other recent chart-review studies, no evidence was found to support the hypothesis that clinical treatment with stimulant medications reduced the growth rates of children with ADHD (Pliszka et al., 2006;Spencer et al., 2006).”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In two recent studies (Pliszka et al., 2006;Spencer et al., 2006) in which drug holidays were allowed but were not systematically varied, stimulantrelated reductions in growth rates were not documented.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“which then was prescribed for most cases when stimulant medication was used to treat children with ADHD”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Klein and Mannuzza (1988) followed the Mattes and Gittelman (1983) sample into adulthood and compared their average size to a nonclinical control group.No difference in height or weight was observed.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Klein and Mannuzza (1988)
- Not checked yetcites Mattes and Gittelman (1983)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“used an immediate-release formulation of methylphenidate (Ritalin”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which may have weeded out the worst treatment responders and more serious cases from the never-medicated group”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These subjects were counted in a medicated group for purpose of the analyses presented here”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the findings here strictly apply to the immediate-release formulation of methylphenidate.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Changes in height and weight in naturalistic subgroups defined by consistent treatment (i.e., with stimulant medication at both the 14-and 24-month assessments or no treatment at either assessment) revealed continued stimulant-related reductions in annual growth rates in the second year for height (j1.04 cm/year) and weight (j1.22 kg/year).”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites MTA Cooperative Group, 2004b
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The MTA implemented state-of-the-art treatment in the early 1990s”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The finding of a reduction in growth rate in height that extends up to 3 years is consistent with two recent retrospective reviews of clinical charts (Lisska and Rivkees, 2003;Poulton and Cowell, 2003)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lisska and Rivkees, 2003
- Not checked yetcites Poulton and Cowell, 2003 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which covered only 3 years after the initiation of treatment in the MTA protocol”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Based on this, they concluded that treatment with stimulant medication does not have an adverse impact on growth of children with ADHD.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Biederman et al. (2003) source
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Kramer et al. (2000) followed the Loney et al. (1981) sample into adulthood and compared height and weight to control groups drawn from family members (unmedicated brothers and fathers), the community (randomly selected classmates), and clinical groups (individuals with clinical problems but never medicated).No differences in self-reported height or weight were documented.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kramer et al. (2000) source
- Not checked yetcites Loney et al. (1981)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The findings reported here from the prospective MTA follow-up suggest that short-term (up to 2 years) effects on height as well as weight may occur when initiating treatment in stimulant-naı ¨ve school-age children with ADHD Combined type.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two recent chart-review studies of children treated with stimulant medication in clinical practices in the United States (Lisska and Rivkees, 2003) and Australia (Poulton and Cowell, 2003) have shown reductions in growth rates for up to 3 years without evidence of growth rebound.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lisska and Rivkees, 2003
- Not checked yetcites Poulton and Cowell, 2003 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“only one stimulant medication (methylphenidate) and one formulation (immediate release) of stimulant medication were systematically evaluated”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“but not with two others (Pliszka et al., 2006;Spencer et al., 2006)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 30
- Probably not a substantial claim. 19
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the baseline assessment, the consistently medicated subgroup was smaller than the inconsistently medicated subgroup, and this difference was maintained over time”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The consistency of medication contrast was also significant, but this was due to a main effect of group without an interaction with assessment time.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“newly medicated: z height 0.073 and z weight 0.293”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“consistently medicated: z height j0.120 and z weight 0.156”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By the 36-month assessment, this subgroup was significantly smaller than the stimulant-untreated clinical control group (not medicated), even though it was nominally larger than the LNCG.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and 4.21 cm shorter and 3.51 kg lighter than the not medicated subgroup.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and 1.1 cm shorter and 0.7 kg lighter than the LNCG.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but was slightly smaller at baseline and did not increase in relative size as much as the not medicated group over the 3-year follow-up.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“was at 36 months 3.04 cm shorter and 2.71 kg lighter than the not medicated subgroup”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The consistently medicated subgroup was 2.3 cm shorter and 1.5 kg lighter than the LNCG”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This difference in annual growth rates may be present for up to 3 years of treatment and accumulate to result in a difference of about 2.0 cm in height and about 2.0 kg in weight.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which suggests lack of effectiveness for stimulant medication at the 36-month assessment in the presence of lingering but significant stimulantrelated reduction in growth rate”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the self-selection to stay not medicated was based largely on satisfactory results with the assigned behavioral treatment, whereas decisions to continue or start medication were not necessarily based on satisfaction with treatment results.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The excess dopamine is dispersed by blood flow, reaches the pituitary, and retards growth in these animals.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bosse et al., 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These subgroups did not differ in severity of ADHD symptoms or initial relative size at the baseline assessment.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both randomization and self-selection operated to form these naturalistic subgroups.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To support the hypothesis of growth rebound, the growth rates of the stimulant-treated groups would have to exceed that of the stimulant-untreated clinical control group, which did not occur in this study.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Compliance with initial randomly assigned treatment conditions was not perfect during the treatment phase, and adherence to these conditions waned during the follow-up phases of the MTA”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > METHOD
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Consensus reviews and statements decades apart (see NIH Consensus Committee, 1998;Roche et al., 1979) discounted the clinical significance of this hypothesis, based on prevailing views that short-term growth suppression may occur but does not result in longterm effects on ultimate size.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites NIH Consensus Committee, 1998
- Not checked yetcites Roche et al., 1979 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The comparison of these two subgroups in terms of growth velocity after initiating medication revealed the time course of stimulant-related reduction in annual growth rate, which was maximal in the first year, decreased in the second year, and absent in the third year of treatment.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
- The authors state this as an assumption: z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
- Rests on an assumption: The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is notable that the four subgroups did not differ on initial size at birth (birth weight), age, parent or teacher ratings of ADHD symptoms, sex, expected adult size (mid-parent size), welfare status, or maternal smoking (Table 2).”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The evidence of growth rebound is inconsistent and mostly circumstantial.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A fourth limitation was the definition of medication use based on information from the SCA-PI.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“the prevailing view is stated, indicating that the literature supports short-term decrements in rate of weight acquisition but not height acquisition, and no long-term effect on ultimate height.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites p 44S
hedged- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“consistency of these classifications by medication have been considered as well, as in the naturalistic subgroups described here and in previous publications on the findings of the MTA follow-up”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“the use of summer (or periodic) holidays, which represent relatively long intervals of nontreatment interspersed within blocks of medication use in clinical practice, has been proposed as a strategy to mitigate stimulant-related reductions in growth rates (Safer et al., 1975)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Safer et al., 1975 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A fifth limitation was the lack of evaluation of planned medication holidays on the weekends or during the summer”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“for the management of possible treatment-related side effects recommends the regular assessment of weight (but not height) as a Bclinical guideline[ but not as a Bminimal standard[ (p 29S)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (2002)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in 1998, 4 years after the initiation of the MTA, another stimulant, the 75:25 ratio of D,L-amphetamine (once used for weight control [Obetrol]) was renamed Adderall and was evaluated for the treatment of ADHD”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“were developed and became widely used in clinical practice, rapidly replacing the prescription of multiple daily doses of immediaterelease stimulant medications for the treatment of ADHD”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and soon after became widely used in clinical practice”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“During the first two stages of treatment to titrate dose and select among alternative stimulants, weekly to monthly monitoring of both height and weight is suggested (Table 2, p 38S)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Table 2, p 38S
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“other definitions are possible and some have been considered here (i.e., total exposure in terms of milligrams consumed or days treated)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In this report the intent-to-treat evaluation of assigned treatment revealed that at 14 months the two groups assigned to systematic stimulant medication showed an initial reduction in growth rate for height (j1.23 cm/year) and weight (j2.48 kg/year), which dissipated by the 24-month assessment.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites MTA Cooperative Group, 2004b
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because Adderall was not available when the MTA was initiated, its effect was not evaluated and thus could not be reported here.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The practice parameter of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (2002) regarding the use of stimulant medication (presently under revision) suggests that height and weight be measured before initiating treatment (p 28S)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (2002)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two different definitions of medication use have been considered for the MTA analyses of efficacy (i.e., within 30 days before an assessment and 50% of the days since the previous assessment)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Mattes and Gittelman (1983) evaluated groups of children with continuous treatment for 1 to 4 years and documented stimulant-related growth deficit that accumulated with the duration of treatment.It was still present during the final year of observation in the group treated for 4 years with methylphenidate, suggesting that growth slowing did not abate during continuous treatment.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mattes and Gittelman (1983)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“but recommendations for long-term monitoring are not explicitly provided”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Spencer et al. (1996) proposed that maturational lag characterized the clinical condition of ADHD, which produced a reduction in growth rate that was correlated with but not necessarily a result of treatment with stimulant medication.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Spencer et al. (1996) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because these controlled-release formulations were not available or used when the MTA was initiated or during the initial two follow-up phases, they were not evaluated and could not be reported here.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, it is possible that the never-medicated group was pared down to good responders and the medicated groups enriched with poor Beh responders.”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Adderall was shown to be effective in a double-blind study (Swanson et al., 1998)”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Limitations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Swanson et al., 1998
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The authors state this as an assumption.
Baseline z scores are expected to be near zero based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA.
“Based on an assumption of normal size at entry to the MTA, the baseline z scores are expected to be near zero”
The authors state this as an assumption.
z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time based on an assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA protocol.
“and based on the assumption of normal growth rates during the MTA implementation of the MTA protocol, the z scores for height and weight are expected to remain constant over time.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The naturalistic subgroups do not differ on unmeasured factors that affect growth.
“The most important limitation of this study is the lack of random assignment to the subgroups that were evaluated here.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The reduction in weight gain appears to be somewhat more pronounced than that for height (over a 3-year period about 3 kg less than predicted) [39, 139].”
From European guidelines on managing adverse effects of medication for ADHD (2011) · cites this paper as [139]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The Multimodal Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA) study results identified stimulants as having a more persistent effect on decreasing growth velocity compared to most previous studies.110”
From Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents (2019) · cites this paper as [110]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Diminished growth was in the range of 1 to 2 cm from predicted adult height.”
From Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents (2019) · cites this paper as [110]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The results of the MTA study were particularly noted among children who were on higher and more consistently administered doses of stimulants.110”
From Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents (2019) · cites this paper as [110]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The effects diminished by the third year of treatment, but no compensatory rebound growth was observed.110”
From Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents (2019) · cites this paper as [110]
In the citing paper
“Current data indicate that the initial effect of stimulants on growth appears to attenuate over time [39, 114, 139] and early studies of the adult outcomes of children treated with stimulant medications have suggested that final adult height is not affected [55, 71].”
From European guidelines on managing adverse effects of medication for ADHD (2011) · cites this paper as [139]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > RESULTS
“not medicated: z height 0.541 and z weight 0.765”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Clinical Implications
“| Not med | 65 | 0.617 0.915 0.113 0.621 0.954 0.118 0.652 | 0.975 0.121 | 0.756 | 1.01 | 0.125 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“Inconsistently (n = 147) | 58:89 | 80:67 | 68:79 | 74:73”
§ Effects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up > Additional information
Reported 74 · recomputed 92
Citations
Cites
(1999) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.56.12.1073 · Cited by 3,372
Greenhill, L. L., Pliszka, S., & Dulcan, M. K. (2002) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200202001-00003 · Cited by 927
Self-citation3-year follow-up of the NIMH MTA study
JENSEN, P. S., ARNOLD, L. E., SWANSON, J. M., VITIELLO, B., ABIKOFF, H. B., GREENHILL, L. L., HECHTMAN, L., HINSHAW, S. P., PELHAM, W. E., WELLS, K. C., et al. (2007) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/chi.0b013e3180686d48 · Cited by 643
Self-citationMTA Cooperative Group (2004) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.113.4.754 · Cited by 589
Wolraich, M. L., Greenhill, L. L., Pelham, W., Swanson, J., Wilens, T., Palumbo, D., Atkins, M., McBurnett, K., Bukstein, O., August, G., et al. (2001) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.108.4.883 · Cited by 502
Self-citationVolkow, N. D., Wang, G., Fowler, J. S., Logan, J., Gatley, S. J., Wong, C., Hitzemann, R., & Pappas, N. R. (1999) · Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/s0022-3565(24)35115-8 · Cited by 422
Self-citationNational Trends in the Use of Psychotropic Medications by Children
Olfson, M., Marcus, S. C., Weissman, M. M., & Jensen, P. S. (2002) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200205000-00008 · Cited by 418
Self-citationMTA Cooperative Group (2004) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.113.4.762 · Cited by 384
Gillberg, C. (1997) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830210105014 · Cited by 340
Volkow, N. D., Wang, G., Fowler, J. S., Logan, J., Franceschi, D., Maynard, L., Ding, Y., Gatley, S. J., Gifford, A., Zhu, W., et al. (2002) · Synapse · doi:10.1002/syn.10038 · Cited by 321
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Caron, 2004, Growth in the dopamine transporter knockout animal model of ADHD, Neuropsychopharmacology, 29, S55
- Gittelman-Klein, 1988, Methylphenidate and growth in hyperactive children, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 36, 212
- Swanson, 2000, Initiating Concerta (OROS methylphenidate HC1) qd in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, J Clin Res, 3, 59
- Wigal, 2003, Selection of the optimal dose ratio for a controlled-delivery formulation of methylphenidate, J Appl Res, 3, 46
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Subcommittee on Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, S. C. O. Q. I. A. M. (2011) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2011-2654 · Cited by 2,185
Pliszka, S. (2007) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/chi.0b013e318054e724 · Cited by 1,765
Wolraich, M. L., Hagan, J. F., Allan, C., Chan, E., Davison, D., Earls, M., Evans, S. W., Flinn, S. K., Froehlich, T., Frost, J., et al. (2019) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2019-2528 · Cited by 1,562
“The Multimodal Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA) study results identified stimulants as having a more persistent effect on decreasing growth velocity compared to most previous studies.(110) Diminished growth was in the range of 1 to 2 cm from predicted adult height.”
InfluentialKooij, S. J., Bejerot, S., Blackwell, A., Caci, H., Casas-Brugué, M., Carpentier, P. J., Edvinsson, D., Fayyad, J., Foeken, K., Fitzgerald, M., et al. (2010) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/1471-244x-10-67 · Cited by 928
“Fronto-striatal dysfunction and increased dopamine transporter density in the striatum have both been reported [83-86] although the finding of increased dopamine transporter density remains a controversial finding, perhaps secondary to drug treatments for ADHD [87,88].”
Updated European Consensus Statement on diagnosis and treatment of adult ADHD
Kooij, J. J. S., Bijlenga, D., Salerno, L., Jaeschke, R., Bitter, I., Balázs, J., Thome, J., Dom, G., Kasper, S., Nunes Filipe, C., et al. (2019) · European Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.11.001 · Cited by 686
Metadata
- Authors
- SWANSON, J. M., ELLIOTT, G. R., GREENHILL, L. L., WIGAL, T., ARNOLD, L. E., VITIELLO, B., HECHTMAN, L., EPSTEIN, J. N., PELHAM, W. E., ABIKOFF, H. B., NEWCORN, J. H., MOLINA, B. S. G., HINSHAW, S. P., WELLS, K. C., HOZA, B., JENSEN, P. S., GIBBONS, R. D., HUR, K., STEHLI, A., DAVIES, M., MARCH, J. S., CONNERS, C. K., CARON, M., & VOLKOW, N. D.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- McGill University (CA)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- University of Vermont (US)
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- Duke University (US)
- Brookhaven National Laboratory (US)
- Corresponding author
- SWANSON, JAMES M.
- ORCID
- SWANSON, JAMES M.
- ELLIOTT, GLEN R.
- GREENHILL, LAURENCE L.
- ARNOLD, L. EUGENE
- VITIELLO, BENEDETTO
- HECHTMAN, LILY
- EPSTEIN, JEFFERY N.
- PELHAM, WILLIAM E.
- ABIKOFF, HOWARD B.
- NEWCORN, JEFFREY H.
- MOLINA, BROOKE S.G.
- HINSHAW, STEPHEN P.
- HOZA, BETSY
- JENSEN, PETER S.
- GIBBONS, ROBERT D.
- STEHLI, ANNAMARIE
- DAVIES, MARK
- VOLKOW, NORA D.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-08
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1015-1027
- ISSN
- 0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2082384177
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 19.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
- Bristol-Myers Squibb
- Eli Lilly and Company
- Pfizer
- AstraZeneca
- GlaxoSmithKline
- Celgene
- H. Lundbeck A/S
- National Institutes of Health (n01mh12011-0-0-1, n01mh012009-007, n01mh012012-001)
- National Institute of Mental Health (N01MH 12011, U01MH50461, N01MH-12012, U01MH50440, U01MH050467, MH-50467, U01 MH50477, U01MH050440, N01 MH12009, U01MH50467, U01MH050461)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Keywords
- stimulant medication, physical growth, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, combined type ADHD, height z-score, weight z-score, medication adherence
- MeSH terms
- Central Nervous System Stimulants, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Behavior Therapy, Child, Combined Modality Therapy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
